noted Would you want ANY heavy aircraft modules for DCS?

I don’t think heavies we can control will appear soon. I would like to see them but thinking practically.

1. Scenery doesn’t really warrant taking off a massive jet with no real distance to go.

2. Pilots do not fly those aircraft by hand, way too hard and unrealistic. They use complex flight management computers with specific waypoints like SIDS and STARS to navigate on a automated route. These are not modelled in DCS. The only time they will take control is takeoff / landing / evasive action etc.

3. Heavies would only attract a limited number of customers or hardcore sim enthusiasts. Most DCS customers like a trigger that does something! I’m a real life pilot and aircraft owner, so I like DCS for its life like flight characteristics!

I feel the only way we would get a 4 engine plane up is push for a AWACS sim, install a few fixes in each map for autopilot and concentrate on a pilot and radar operator. It would be fun to ping enemy and give details re real voice over net! Only issue is that the maps are too small. You would need constant high alt fighter babysitting or enemy would engage you and make it an early end of your game!!

Same empty arguments all over again and again.

Maps too small

You want supplies from Vaziani to Kutaisi you have to deliver. You want AWACS in the area? You fly there. Tanker is needed so you go on where it's needed. Distance has nothing to do with it. You don't have only long flights IRL. Strikers need CAP cover too. What's the problem?

Players don't want it

Look at Christen Eagle. You think players requested it? Now look at the poll. AI tankers, AWACS and transport are in almost all missions and now it seems like boring or not used? Apart from that this is a wish list. And it's a wish of many. Quite realistic compared to other funny requests.

Autopilot

Depends on the airframe and time. Anyway the take off and landing are most fun parts and you can choose to fly manually whenever you want.

No combat

Yes. Military is not only about combat. We already have transport campaigns and missions for helicopters and we already have many trainer aircraft. SAR, recce, EW, etc... - somebody has to do it.

Do you know that many military flights IRL are boring long hours loiters, not long distance, where nothing happens at all?

btw: fighters alone have not win any war.

No.

I'd love to see more AI heavies (and indeed more AI plane full stop)

Not convinced by DCS handling of multi-crew (even Heatblurs valiant attempt with Jester in the F14 is sub-par) so not excited by the thought of any multi-crew planes...

Not withstanding the tiny size of DCS maps makes missions far beyond problematic...unless you REALLY want Airstart/F10 Menu to complete Missions...

Not into commercial flight sims...but can't the likes of X-plane/the forthcoming MS Flight Sim do a solid job of simulating "heavies" - as (with a few exceptions) their mission profiles are essentially flight with very little combat...

Well if not heavies, then at least 2-engine transports. Much more to combat simulation than just furballing and dropping ordnance.

Or just split the sim into two branches. The first can still be called DCS, but the second should be named DFS, a.k.a. the Digital Furball Simulator. :huh::cry: :megalol:

They are already working on two branches. DCS:World and Modern Air Combat. I imagine MAC will be nothing but turning and burning and blowing stuff up. That will leave DCS to be a more fully fleshed out combat simulator.

I get a lot of enjoyment flying the UH-1H and Mi-8MTv2 in the pure transport role. I'd love to have a flyable C-130, B-1B or KC-10 in game.:pilotfly:

C-130 gunship makes much more sense in our World. That should be workable.

MegOhm_SD said:

C-130 gunship makes much more sense in our World. That should be workable.

Indeed...5 crew C-130 will be a cinch...never-mind the gunship that has extra some to work the guns.

I wonder how long will it take considering such a complex aircraft?

An AI model would be much better...

Personally I would rather see planes like the F-4, F-105, A6, A7 and of course any 5th generation aircraft as they become possible.

I think that for the heavyweight category within dcs, strategic and tactical bombers such as b-1, tu-22, su-24, f-111 would be better suited, since even the b-1 can have an interesting flexibility and perform missions that would fit the tactical bombers.

Some heavy helos would be nice. Mi-26 would be my first choice but Chinook or CH-53 would be just as much fun. We need some heavy beasts in the sim :D

Skip to 4:57 to see awesome formation take-off of two Mi-26's and a bunch of other Russian helicopters including Ka-50's and Mi-8's.

Nice vid in general, just had to share it. Sorry if maybe veering off topic.

Functionaly an Mi-26 wouldn't be too different from the Mi-8 we already have, although it would be really cool. I'd rather see a CH-46 as it would add something new with the tandem rotor and it would go well on the Tarawa.

True, tandem rotor would add more variety and I'd easily go for a Sea Knight. It would indeed go well on the Tarawa.

C-130 gunship makes much more sense in our World. That should be workable.

yes, the gunship mostly wanted. multiple firing stations.

but this is only fun if DCS gets finally a better way to represent grounds and theatre activities.

at current condidtions you can even get bored with a highly versitile C-130.

before adding new aircraft, DCS should overhaul its entire "world" model. It's 2020 gentlemen, not 1995 anymore.

yes, the gunship mostly wanted. multiple firing stations.

 

but this is only fun if DCS gets finally a better way to represent grounds and theatre activities.

at current condidtions you can even get bored with a highly versitile C-130.

 

before adding new aircraft, DCS should overhaul its entire "world" model. It's 2020 gentlemen, not 1995 anymore.

I agree that one of the first things that DCS needs to do is update the engine and world to support more core functions. Because as is DCS can only support the simulation of up to two engines. So before any multi engine heavy aircraft even can be considered DCS needs to be updated to support it.

but I think the wisest would be an E-2D followed by the C-2A. If you see on YouTube guys are already using the F10 map to play AWACS, with the E-2 you could still fly and in the orbit switch to a radar officer station. As for the C-2, you could do the cargo ops flying between shore airfields or shore fields to the carrier.

Whelp, you just sold me on the idea. I would buy an E-2 module.

I would like to see finished versions of all current models first!

Given the size of the available theatres, I don't see the point in large aircraft. They implicitly are for long distance operations.

Although I've spent decades with MSFS and P3D (I only stopped for the time being due to the lack of VR support there) and despite the fact I absolutely enjoy operating an Airbus or a 747, I really dont see any use for such kind of flying in DCS.

What exactly would be the funny part in flying an Antonov 124 from Batumi to Mozdok? I guess they wouldn't even retract the gear for such a hop :lol:

What exactly would be the funny part in flying an Antonov 124 from Batumi to Mozdok? I guess they wouldn't even retract the gear for such a hop :lol:

Sounds ideal, most interesting part (TO and landing) without long boring trans. Maps are perfect for this. And guys don't have to wait for hours for a supply.

I would like to see finished versions of all current models first!

Kinda useless wish in a wish thread for an aircraft.

I would like to see finished versions of all current models first!

+10:thumbup:

What exactly would be the funny part in flying an Antonov 124 from Batumi to Mozdok? I guess they wouldn't even retract the gear for such a hop :lol:

Why does it have to be the An-124 or B-52?

A smaller and slower planes, like C-130 and An-26, could be used for supplying and escorting missions. They both aren't that complex, so multi-crew is not necessary (a Jester-like menu for basic nav stuff should be enough).

The base C-130 module could further be expanded with free or paid upgrades (AC-130, KC-130) that will make it even more useful and interesting.

I'll rarely say no to "do you want X in DCS", but I'll probably say "yes, but I want A, B, and C first". I'd love a C-130 if we get a logistics system tied into the dynamic campaign/MP, for example

One of the things I liked about the original Su-27 Flanker sim 25 years ago is that it had a relatively deep collection of AI assets For the time that could be used in missions and this was very welcome.

Flash forward to 2020 and it seems we have a woeful lack of improvement in the depth of the AI aircraft collection available for mission creation. Just take the Nevada theatre for example, how many types of aircraft operate in that airspace on a daily basis? Many many more than are in DCS.

I know this is sort of a different issue from flyable aircraft, but it is inexplicable to me that there isn’t more emphasis on continual improvement of the AI asset base. Of course most of us want fighters first, attack aircraft and bombers second, cargo and support aircraft third, and then maybe civilian aircraft as a distant fourth.

The thing is, cargo and civilian aircraft are much easier to model because they don’t have the elaborate weapon systems of the more combat focused aircraft. It’s unclear to me why ED, which at one point seemed really interested in having a broad collection of AI aircraft has just done so little to expand its collection.

I also think ED is missing the boat by keeping module development tools so close. If this was more open we’d see more developers do modules, and I’d guess some of the simpler to develop modules would emerge to fit this much needed aircraft inventory gap.

What if a developer’s module or associated AI (which should be free to all DCS users for consistency) isn’t up to standards? We are always free not to use it in our missions or allow it on our servers.

It seems like DCS at this point has a small moat to competition in the realistic combat simulation area, but maybe the way to keep this edge isn’t to have such a narrow look on the world’s aircraft and airspace.

I think ED should be quickly moving toward a whole world medium detail simulation in which the existing detailed combat theatres could be layered on top like scenery packs in civilian flight sims. Having a larger collection of flyable and AI assets of all types would add to the immersion and grow the user base and broad appeal of DCS.

I would buy a c130 module if it costs 50 quids or less, can shoot at stuff (ac130 variant), drop troops and do surface to air recovery.

Otherwise, no, not interested.

Edit: and it should be finished when released. Please no more of this EA circus.